Crime, Constitutional Conflicts, and Compensation “Round-Up” into One Complex Case for the 19th JDC

Oct. 21, 2014
By Lauren Rivera, Senior Associate

In April 2013, East Baton Rouge District Attorney Hillar Moore held a meeting with suspected members of various local violent groups in an effort to dismantle criminal organizations in Louisiana. Among those summoned by Moore were members and associates of the “Big Money Block Boyz,” one of about 30 active street gangs in Baton Rouge, an organization based out of the criminally concentrated Gardere area. The group is believed to be responsible for years of heavy narcotics trafficking, several shootings, and other acts of violence throughout the parish. At the meeting, community leaders and local law enforcement agencies warned members of the Block Boyz that if the group failed to heed their warning and another homicide occurred, the entire group would become the subject of an investigation.[1]

Continue reading

Winner, Winner, Chicken Dinner: Should Louisiana Ante Up to Legalize and Regulate Online Gambling?

Oct. 20, 2014
By Stephen G. Collura, Jr., Senior Editor

We do almost everything on the Internet today. People use the Internet to make purchases, play games, watch movies, and even conduct research for pieces of scholarship. In fact, you are using the Internet to read this article right now. However, if you are in Louisiana, or any state besides Nevada, your other open Internet pages cannot be displaying your winning hand in an online poker game.

In reaction to the wave of Internet gambling[1] that came about during the late 1990s, Congress and several state legislatures, including Louisiana, passed statutes criminalizing online gambling.[2] Although other countries around the world initially took this approach, the United States remains one of the last developed countries to continue to hold steadfast against online gambling[3]—the exceptions being Nevada, New Jersey, and Delaware.[4]  Many parts of the world have proven that a system of regulation, as opposed to a complete ban, can be successful while still providing protection to participants.[5]

Continue reading

Some Children Left Behind: Reconsidering Louisiana’s School Voucher Program

Last year, the Louisiana Supreme Court found the state school voucher program unconstitutional, and recently the troubled program has made news again.1 In August, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit to enjoin implementation of the program in parishes that are under federal school desegregation orders.2

Despite these significant legal challenges, however, Governor Bobby Jindal and some state lawmakers continue to vehemently defend the program. In the wake of the recent rulings, these officials are attempting to redesign the program to avoid running afoul of state and federal law. As the Legislature is reconsidering how to implement the program, there is another significant legal hurdle that program advocates will likely need to address if the program is to survive. Specifically, legislators will need to reconsider the participation of students with disabilities, or special education students.

Currently, there are two separate programs through which special education students may obtain a private school voucher: the general voucher program that accepts both disabled and non-disabled students, or the special education voucher program specifically designed for students with disabilities. Unfortunately, neither of these programs does a satisfactory job of ensuring equal access to educational opportunities for special education students.

Continue reading

Two Wrongs Don’t Make a Right: Fraudulent Concealment of Legal Malpractice in Louisiana

By Casey Auttonberry

No one enjoys being sued. But for lawyers, being sued for malpractice does not just mean potential monetary damages; it is also likely to damage the lawyer’s reputation. Fortunately, the Louisiana Legislature has attempted to give lawyers at least a little peace of mind. Louisiana Revised Statutes section 9:5605 has been described as “A Louisiana Lawyer’s Best Friend.”1 This is largely because the time periods set forth by the statute protect the lawyer if the client does not act quickly:

A. No action for damages against any attorney at law duly admitted to practice in this state . . . shall be brought unless filed in a court of competent jurisdiction and proper venue within one year from the date of the alleged act, omission, or neglect, or within one year from the date that the alleged act, omission, or neglect is discovered or should have been discovered; however, even as to actions filed within one year from the date of such discovery, in all events such actions shall be filed at the latest within three years from the date of the alleged act, omission, or neglect.2

Section 9:5605(B) makes the one-year and three-year limitation periods peremptive.3 Peremption is similar to prescription, but in practice it can be a very different creature. Unlike prescription, peremption cannot be “renounced, interrupted, or suspended.”4 Also, when a prescriptive period runs, the cause of action is merely barred; when a peremptive period runs, the cause of action is destroyed entirely.5 Considering these characteristics of peremption, it is easy to see why section 9:5605 is regarded as a friend to attorneys.

Continue reading